Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [ancient_waterways_society] size of Cahokia mounds

Expand Messages
  • Vincent Barrows
    In our Scientific age, the volume of an object and dimensions of a land mass would seem to be easily meaurable. Survey/ topographic maps are two ways to
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 22, 2010
      In our "Scientific age, the volume of an object and dimensions of a land mass would seem to be easily meaurable. Survey/ topographic maps are two ways to determine these values. Strangely, many sources have varying values for these measurements. For example, the following quote from the state historic preservation agency website show varying heights of monks mound that were published through time:
      "Using the 130-meter contour line for the base, the height is 28.1 meters (92.2 feet); using the 128-meter contour gives 30.1 meters (98.8 feet). It is possible that the north-south and east-west dimensions shown by the 130-meter contour are closer to the true dimensions of the base of the mound. McAdams (1882) reports a height of 108 feet (32.9 meters), Thomas (1894),100 feet (30.5 meters), and Peterson-McAdams (1906), 104.5 feet (31.8 meters). It seems from these various data that the height currently is in the vicinity of 100 feet (30.5 meters). "

       

      Here are a few statements to consider:
      The volume of monks mound  from ground level up is approximately 21,551,623 cubic feet (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/arqueologia/monks_mound01.htm#Introduction)
      Great Pyramids volume is 90,000,000 cubic feet (http://www.gizapyramid.com/newtour1.htm)
      This ratio shows that the Great Pyramid is about 4.2 times the volume of Monks Mound.
      The height of the Great Pyramid is about 13 acres at its base, while Monks Mound is about 14.4 acres.
       
      Vince

       

      From: Martin Carriere <metismartin@...>
      To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Mon, March 22, 2010 8:41:10 PM
      Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] size of Cahokia mounds

       

      Wonderful news that mainstream enthusiasm is surfacing again. I am glad there are still descendants of the mound builders who may enjoy again the peaceful acknowledgment of their human ancestor's accomplishments. Hopefully we can all work together on building a new future where great accomplishments are rewarded with love and blessings.
       
      Best regards,
       
      Martin 

      --- On Mon, 3/22/10, Ted Sojka <tedsojka@mchsi. com> wrote:

      From: Ted Sojka <tedsojka@mchsi. com>
      Subject: [ancient_waterways_ society] size of Cahokia mounds
      To: ancient_waterways_ society@yahoogro ups.com
      Received: Monday, March 22, 2010, 7:29 PM

       

      Dear All,

      I think that the fellow in the post about the mound means the sum
      total of all the earthen mounds in the area would equal the size of
      three Giza pyramids. I was taught that it was 17 acres at the base of
      Monks Mound while Giza, that was taller was 14 acres at its
      base. Hyperbole is also a possibility.

      The main point is that old data is being reviewed and tossed evidence
      will eventually be mainstream fact in years to come.

      Ted



      Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!


    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.